Correction

This article refers to:

Efficacy of cysteamine cream in the treatment of epidermal melasma, evaluating by Dermacatch as a new measurement method: a randomized double blind placebo controlled study

Article title: Efficacy of cysteamine cream in the treatment of epidermal melasma, evaluating by Dermacatch as a new measurement method: a randomized double blind placebo controlled study.

Authors: Susan Farshi, Parvin Mansouri & Behrooz Kasraee (2018)

Journal: Journal of Dermatological Treatment

Bibliometrics: Volume 29, Number 2, pages 182–189

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09546634.2017.1351608

When the above article was first published online, there were errors in Table 1 and Table 5. In Table 1, there should be 20 patients in the Cysteamine Group instead of 28 and 20 patients in the Placebo Group instead of 25. In Table 5, there should be 20 patients in the Dyspigmentation category instead of 25.

Table 1. Baseline patient characteristics

Variable	Cysteamine (n = 20)	Placebo (n = 20)
Age (years), mean ± SD	39.9 ± 6.9	39.7 ± 6.3
Sex, n (%)
Male	4 (20)	2 (10)
Female	16 (80)	18 (90)
Skin Type
III	14 (70)	15 (75)
IV	6 (30)	5 (25)
Duration of melasma (years), mean ± SD	5.97 ± 4.4	5.2 ± 4.5
MSS
Minimal residual pigmentation	0	0
Mild	3 (15)	6 (30)
Moderate	14 (70)	13 (65)
Severe	3 (15)	1 (5)
MASI Scores (mean ± SD)	18.1 ± 8.2	13.2 ± 7.4
Dermacatch findings (mean ± SD)*	65.4 ± 22.6	52.9 ± 16.4
Mexameter findings (mean ± SD)*	93.7 ± 42.4	72.3 ± 27.8

MSS: Melasma Severity Score; MASI: Melasma Area Severity Index.

*mean: mean difference between lesion and surrounding normal skin.

Table 5. Adverse events reported in the placebo and cysteamine groups.

		Placebo		Cysteamine
	Grade	N	%	N	%
Erythema	0	20	100	13	65
	1	0	0	4	20
	2	0	0	3	15
	3	0	0	0	0
Dryness	0	20	100	16	80
	1	0	0	4	20
	2	0	0	0	0
	3	0	0	0
Itching	0	20	100	15	75
	1	0	0	5	25
	2	0	0	0	0
	3	0	0	0	0
Burning	0	20	100	15	75
	1	0	0	3	15
	2	0	0	2	10
	3	0	0	0	0
Irritation	0	20	100	16	80
	1	0	0	3	15
	2	0	0	1	5
	3	0	0	0	0
Dyspigmentation	0	20	100	20	100
	1	0	0	0	0
	2	0	0	0	0
	3	0	0	0	0

The authors apologize for this error.

Updated Tables 1 and 5 are included below for reference: